ARMENIA CORRECTS IMBALANCE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 YEREVAN 000030 SENSITIVE SIPDIS USDOJ/OPDAT for Carl Alexandre and Catherine Newcombe E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV PHUM KDEM KJUS AM SUBJECT: ARMENIA CORRECTS IMBALANCE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM REFS: A) 09 YEREVAN 403 B) 08 YEREVAN 369 YEREVAN 00000030 001.3 OF 002 -------------- SUMMARY -------------- ¶1. (SBU) On January 14, Armenia's Constitutional (Supreme) Court struck down as unconstitutional a controversial criminal code statute that allowed defense attorneys, victims, or witnesses -- but not prosecutors -- to be charged with contempt of court for acting contemptuously to a judge. The statute in question assumed a prominent political profile in July 2009 when it was used against several defense attorneys representing a pro-opposition tycoon who fell out of favor with the authorities after supporting the 2008 presidential campaign of ex-President Levon Ter-Petrossian. On January 19, a Yerevan court subsequently dismissed the charges against the three defense attorneys, who risked losing their license to practice had they been found guilty. The ruling on the statute -- in response to a suit brought by Armenia's Human Rights Defender -- corrected an inherent imbalance in Armenia's criminal justice system, and marks a rare, welcome victory for legal reform. END SUMMARY. -------------- -- CONTROVERSIAL STATUTE DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL -------------- -- ¶2. (SBU) On January 14, Armenia's Constitutional (Supreme) Court struck down as unconstitutional a controversial criminal statute that allowed defense attorneys, victims, and witnesses -- but not prosecutors -- in a court case to be charged with contempt of court for acting contemptuously to a judge. The Court found the article to be unconstitutional because it failed to include the actions of a prosecutor within the scope of the law. The case against the statute was brought to the Constitutional Court by Armen Harutiunian, the Human Rights Defender in Armenia, at the request of Armenia's Chamber of Advocates (Defense Bar). -------------- STATUTE HAD HIGH POLITICAL PROFILE -------------- ¶3. As of January 18, there were four defense attorneys charged with Contempt of Court based on this statute. Three of them -- Artur Petrosian, Diana Grigorian, and Ara Zakarian -- had this charge brought against them while they were defending two employees of a pizza chain owned by the pro-opposition tycoon and member of parliament Khachatur Sukiasian (reftels). Sukiasian fell out of favor with the authorities during the 2008 presidential election when he openly supported the campaign of ex-President Levon Ter-Petrossian, and subsequently found his extensive business assets targeted with aggressive tax raids, expropriation, and criminal cases. -------------- CORRECTING AN IMBALANCE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE -------------- ¶4. (SBU) The Constitutional Court's action corrects a significant imbalance in Armenia's adversarial criminal justice system. At present, Armenian judges work hand-in-hand with prosecutors, much to the frustration of the defense bar. In the Sukiasian pizza chain case, the defense attorneys discovered that the trial judge had allegedly back-dated a document relating to one of the defendant's incarceration status. When the attorneys complained to the court, the judge refused to review the matter or disqualify herself. With no other recourse the three attorneys left the courtroom, prompting the judge to hold them in contempt. When the defense attorneys then asked the administrative judge for an investigation into the action of the trial judge, the administrative judge referred the matter to the prosecutors to open an investigation against the defense attorneys only, ignoring the allegations against the trial judge. ¶5. (SBU) This case is but one in a number of instances in which Armenia's judicial and prosecutorial authorities have sought to put defense attorneys "in their place." Although the criminal penalties for "disrespectful treatment" are relatively lenient (one month's incarceration),it can also result in the attorney losing his license to practice law. Accordingly, the law has had a chilling effect on the Defense Bar, making defense attorneys extremely careful in watching what they say. -------------- DEFENSE ATTORNEYS HAVE CHARGES DISMISSED -------------- YEREVAN 00000030 002.3 OF 002 ¶6. (SBU) On January 19, the first instance court of Yerevan's Arabkir and Zeytun communities acquitted Petrosian, Grigorian, and Zakarian. The Contempt of Court charges against all three were dismissed after the Constitutional Court ruling declared as unconstitutional the charges leveled against them. As of today, then, only one defense attorney in Armenia remains charged with Contempt of Court (Moushegh Shushanian),but we expect those charges to be dismissed in the near future. Shushanian was also defending a pro-opposition supporter jailed after the March 2008 post-election unrest when the Contempt of Court charge was leveled against him. -------------- COMMENT -------------- ¶7. (SBU) The ruling by the Constitutional Court comes as an unexpected surprise, and represents a rare, welcome victory for legal reform. In a country where the executive branch has long dominated the judicial branch, and where the judiciary has been aggressively -- and arbitrarily -- used to punish the political opposition for its contesting the results of the 2008 presidential election, the development assumes even greater significance. It is of course possible that the law will be amended to include prosecutors, but then only be applied to defense attorneys. But we will check our cynicism for today, and accept the ruling as a victory for the rule of law in a place -- and at a politically sensitive time -- where such victories come few and far between. YOVANOVITCH